List Parallels VMs

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: it promises exhaustive enumeration ('every registered') and identifies 'current power state' as the data returned. This is adequate for a simple list operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning: 'every registered' defines scope and 'current power state' defines the output content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema and idempotence annotations, the description is complete. It states what is listed and what field is included, so an agent has enough information to select and invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The description need not add parameter details, and the baseline for a parameterless tool is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('every registered Parallels VM') with an explicit detail ('current power state'). The phrase 'every registered' clearly establishes an inventory operation and distinguishes it from vm_status or single-VM action tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for enumerating all VMs and their power states, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as vm_status for a single VM or when not to use this tool. The use case is inferable but not spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.